9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (12) TMI 825X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t dated 25.03.2016 has been issued by the Income Tax Officer, Ward- 3, Vapi whereas the assessment has been made by the Income Tax Officer, Ward- 3 Valsad. Thus, the Income Tax Officer, Ward-3, Vapi had issued the notice under section 148 of the Act, who had no jurisdiction over the assessee, as the jurisdiction was lying with Income Tax Officer, Ward-3, Valsad. Therefore, notice under section 148 of the Act, is not sustainable in law hence, assessment proceedings may be quashed. 4. Au contraire, the ld. Sr. D.R. submitted the assessee has filed his return of income with Income Tax Officer, Ward- 1, Vapi (PB-1 to 4) and as per PAN database; the jurisdiction was lying with the Income Tax Officer, Ward- 3 Vapi at the relevant time. Therefore, without specifically intimating the new address to the AO with respect to change of address, and without getting PAN database changed in not enough. The learned D.R. support her view by placing reliance in the case of Pr.CIT v. M/s. IVen Interactive Limited [ Civil Appeal No. 8132 of 2019 dated 18.10.2019] of Hon'ble Supreme Court, copy filed notice issued under section 148 of the Act is issued on valid jurisdiction. 5. We have heard the r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... income is shown in return of income. The explanation submitted after reopening of assessment. Having bills and expenditure in the name of the assessee does not make one as agriculturist. Accordingly, the cash deposits were taxed as per provisions of section 115BBE and 69 of the Act. 8. Being, aggrieved, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT (A).Wherein it was contended that the assessee has showed sale of agricultural products in cash of Rs. 15, 90,622and net agricultural income of Rs. 9, 54,373. In ICICI bank, there are cash deposits of Rs. 10, 87,975 and cheque deposit of Rs. 45,879. This cash deposits is out of agricultural income earned. The assessee has filed copy of 7/12, and claimed that land belonged to the father of the assessee who is 95 years old, mother is 90 years old ., one brother Dinkarn expired and another brother is Chandrakant is non-resident settled in London. Thus, the assessee is only doing agricultural activity. Hence, the agricultural income shown by the assessee is correct. The assessee filed a certificate from Talati, Village Tighra certifying thatmangoes and chikoo trees are being grown on the land. The assessee is only person who is looking a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... her is non-resident residing in London. It was submitted that ample evidence has been furnished of land holding and even if the agricultural income were to be divided among, even there would be no tax implication as agricultural income is exempt. However, the facts is that the agricultural income of family members is shown by the assessee in his return of income and out of which cash deposits in the bank account has been made. The said bank account is reflected in balance sheet as on 31.03.2009. Hence, no and under section 69 could be made. In the alternate, it was submitted that if agricultural income is considered of the family members, then the same may be treated as loan to the assessee and for explaining the source of cash deposits. Therefore, CIT(A) was wrongly sustained the addition made by the AO. 10. Per contra, the ld. Sr. D.R. submitted the agricultural land does not stand in the name of the assessee nor it is disclosed in return of income. The pattern of cash deposits in bank account is not commensurate with sale of crop asper season. The assessee is trading in shares where these cash deposits have been used. Therefore, CIT (A) was justified in upholding the addition ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ision was introduced u/s. 80TTA with effect from 01.04.2013. Hence, confirmed the same. In view of these circumstances and facts that the assessee has agreed for addition during the course of assessment proceedings, we do not find any merit in this ground, hence, it is dismissed. 14. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed. I.T.A.No. 356/SRT/2019/A.Y. 2010-11:- 15. Ground No.1 is against the reopening of assessment u/s.147 and issue of notice under section 148 of the Act. 16. Learned Counsel submitted that reopening of assessment has been made on the basis of cash deposits in bank account which cannot be basis for reopening of assessment as held in the case of Shri Ravindrasinh N Gohil v. ITO Wd-1(1) Bhavnagar [I.T.A.No. 33343&3344/AHD/2015 dated 04.09.2019 and Shri Bahadur Singh Sijwali v. ITO [I.T.A.No. 3814/Del/11 dated 20.01.2015]. 17. Per contra, the ld. Sr. D.R. submitted that bank account was not disclosed in the return of income filed by the assessee and same was having substantial cash deposits. Further, as held by the Hon`ble Supreme Court in the case of ACIT v Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers (P) Ltd. [2007] 291 ITR 500 (SC) the primafacie reaso ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
